Simple question, do you agree or not? My country (Britain/England) seems to be rather hypocritical on this. We claim that the Falklands are ours because all people have the right to self-determination and the Falklanders want to remain British, but we are rejecting any talk of a Crimean referendum (not too sure how we justify this other than openly admitting we're hypocritical cunts).

Chas has criticised my stance on this on the basis that the Falklanders are choosing to stay as part of a country, not leave one. I completely reject this as self-determination must go both ways for it to be real.

What are anyone else's views?

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....BestFerdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.WorstFerdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.

(08-03-2014 06:27 PM)Hughsie Wrote: Simple question, do you agree or not? My country (Britain/England) seems to be rather hypocritical on this. We claim that the Falklands are ours because all people have the right to self-determination and the Falklanders want to remain British, but we are rejecting any talk of a Crimean referendum (not too sure how we justify this other than openly admitting we're hypocritical cunts).

Chas has criticised my stance on this on the basis that the Falklanders are choosing to stay as part of a country, not leave one. I completely reject this as self-determination must go both ways for it to be real.

What are anyone else's views?

Considering the fact that the vote was not raised until Russian troops invaded I think it is slightly suspect. That said the falkland vote was just as much of a farce.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote: America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense

(08-03-2014 06:27 PM)Hughsie Wrote: Simple question, do you agree or not? My country (Britain/England) seems to be rather hypocritical on this. We claim that the Falklands are ours because all people have the right to self-determination and the Falklanders want to remain British, but we are rejecting any talk of a Crimean referendum (not too sure how we justify this other than openly admitting we're hypocritical cunts).

Chas has criticised my stance on this on the basis that the Falklanders are choosing to stay as part of a country, not leave one. I completely reject this as self-determination must go both ways for it to be real.

What are anyone else's views?

Considering the fact that the vote was not raised until Russian troops invaded I think it is slightly suspect. That said the falkland vote was just as much of a farce.

No, that is not what I meant.

Argentina was claiming sovereignty without regard to the peoples' wishes.

Of course the English are hypocritical cunts: Scotland, Ireland, Wales.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.

Russian military has been in Crimea for many years. Sevastopol has been a military district for hundreds of years. Crimea has its own constitution, and Russian military are allowed to maneuver around Crimea. This has been true for decades.

There have been claims that forces around Crimea, the unidentified ones, are from Russian military bases. But that would just be speculation.

But say there's hard evidence that it was Russian military, and they were doing something not already written down in past agreements...

How would it be an invasion if the lawful president of the country, and the lawful executive and members of parliament of Crimea REQUESTED Russian assistance against the coup imposed government in Kiev? Intervention =/= invasion.

How big does the region have to be?
Can a household separate from the US to be it's own country/join another?
Can a Neighborhood?
Can a City?
Can a District?
Can a Province/State?

Drawing a line would be arbitrary.

How big of a margin do they have to win by? Is 51% good enough? What about the other 49%?

What about immigration, used as a tool to sway the vote. Who decides who can move into a region or not? Stopping people for political reasons is unacceptable. Whether they were pro or against separation.

How many times do they bring up the vote? Do they keep voting until they separate? And if they win, do they keep voting to see if they rejoin? What's the time period between votes? Do they vote every year? Once every 5yrs? 10yrs? 50yrs?

(08-03-2014 06:55 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote: Drawing a line would be arbitrary.

You're right that any lines are arbitrary, and everybody draws arbitrary lines. As much as I'm for self-determination, if one family in the middle of New York City wanted to secede their home from the US, NY, and NYC, I'd agree that, probably no matter where you draw the line, this is on the 'not allowed' side.

However, the situation in Crimea is also imo indisputably on the 'allowed' side of any arbitrary line. It's an autonomous area with 2 million people that already had it's own functioning democracy, and even a separate military presence, it was already isolated from Western Ukraine based on language and culture. And it seems the people overwhelmingly support leaving Ukraine.

If it were reversed and Ukraine was majority pro-Russia, and Crimea was a breakaway pro-EU region, the Western countries would be demanding they had a right to self-determination. IMO, the West is a bunch of hypocrites on this.

(08-03-2014 07:38 PM)frankksj Wrote: If it were reversed and Ukraine was majority pro-Russia, and Crimea was a breakaway pro-EU region, the Western countries would be demanding they had a right to self-determination. IMO, the West is a bunch of hypocrites on this.

Yes, without a doubt.

However, I'll also point out that in such a situation Russia would probably do what the west are currently doing and do their utmost to thwart it.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....BestFerdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.WorstFerdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.

Well the US had a war, and defeated those who claimed they had the right to "self determination", so as a nation, the US doesn't go for that sort of thing. I suggest that ANY *referendum* in the present circumstances is invalid. I mean with the Russian army breathing down your neck :
"wanna be a Russki" ?
How is being in the minority, wanting secession and voting FOR it, and not getting it, "self determination" ?
Is it productive to have repeated votes for "self determination" just because e few people get pissed off ?

Insufferable know-it-all. God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.

(08-03-2014 07:47 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote: ANY *referendum* in the present circumstances is invalid. I mean with the Russian army breathing down your neck :
"wanna be a Russki" ?

Do you have ANY evidence to support your claim, or are you just fabricating this because it fits your agenda. I have read NOTHING to suggest that the Crimean parliament was strong-armed by Russian military to vote for secession. In fact, it's the opposite, the people of Crimea were asking for Russian invention.

These comparisons to Hitler are so laughable, because Russia is actually doing what the US and UK did for France AGAINST Hitler. The French WANTED US/UK troops to come to France and help them fight off the Germans. And the US/UK obliged. Do you seriously call that "an invasion"? Would you say it was the US/UK who were the aggressors and invaded France during WWII? Since Russia is just doing the same thing it's equally absurd to call Russia's actions an invasion either.